Find a Lawyer

Criminal Appeals Nos. 187 and 188 of 1976, decided on 7th December, 1985.

(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 31‑10‑1975 in Criminal Appeal No. 927).

‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 377‑‑Leave to appeal granted to consider whether conviction could rest only on solitary statement of victim and unproved report of Chemical Analyser, moreso when he (victim) evacuated his bowels and was medically examined after 26 hours in which case it was not possible to retain traces of semen in anus.

‑‑‑S. 377‑‑Convictions based on statement of victim and supporting testimony of eye‑witnesses‑‑No reason of implication‑‑Factum of Commission of offence by accused established beyond doubt Medical opinion supporting charge‑‑Mere presence of semen could not be a decisive factor in context of other important features noted medically which go to show commission of act‑‑Held, there was no rule of law or prudence to require corroboration of story of victim, if otherwise his testimony answers quality required for conviction‑‑Appeals being devoid of merits, dismissed.

Mirza Abdullah Anwer Beg, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate‑on‑Record for Appellant (in Criminal Appeal No. 187 of 1976).

Dr. Khalid Ranjha, Advocate and S. Wajid Hussain, Advocate‑on -Record (absent) for Appellant (in Criminal Appeal No. 188 of 1976).

M. Bilal, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Abid Nawaz, Advocate- on‑Record (absent) for the State.

Date of hearing: 7th December, 1985.

‑Leave to appeal was granted to consider whether conviction could rest only on the solitary statement of the victim, Muhammad Waqar, and unproved report of the Chemical Analyser, the moreso when he evacuated his bowels and was medically examined after 26 hours in which case it was not possible to. retain traces of semen in the anus.

Muhammad Waqar, aged 13 years, was subjected to carnal inter course by appellant Abdullah Usman after being physically lifted while he was proceeding towards his house on a bicycle on 21‑4‑1974 at 8‑00 p.m. Abdullah Usman had caught hold of his neck and gagged his mouth while Yasin lifted him by his legs and the acquitted accused, Shahid Pervez, held his cycle. He was taken to a nearby House No. 52‑P, which was uninhabited at that time. Yasin and Shahid Pervez waited outside while Abdullah Usman took him inside a room and forcibly committed carnal intercourse. He was beaten when he raised cries and evacuated his bowels after the act was over. On hearing his cries his brother Muhammad Asrar (P.W. 3) and one other person Shaukat Amir (P.W. 4) came to his rescue and on seeing them Abdullah Usman slipped away through another door.

The matter was reported at Police Station, A‑Division, Sahiwal on 22‑4‑1974 at 1‑30 p.m. On the same day at 9‑45 p.m. he was medically examined by Dr. Muhammad Hussain who found two tear‑marks at 12 O'clock position and the mucus membrane inside the anus to be congested. He took. two swabs from inside the anus and sent them for chemical examination. He also noticed two abrasions on either side of the nose but the other marks of violence were not visible. On being examined he referred to, the number of the report of the Chemical Analyser showing the presence of semen in the swabs which was, however, not brought on record. He finally stated that having regard to the report and the injuries found inside the anus it was established that the victim was subjected to carnal intercourse.

P.W. Muhammad Asrar established the presence of Yasin and Shahid Pervez outside the house, and on being questioned gave to them an evasive answer as to the person making the noise. Nonetheless, Muhammad Asrar recognized the voice of his own brother and went inside the room where he saw the victim being subjected to carnal intercourse.

We have examined ourselves the statement of the victim and the supporting testimony of Muhammad Asrar and Shaukat Amir, and we are satisfied that the appellant Abdullah Usman was rightly convicted and so was Yasin. Nothing has been brought to our notice as to why Muhammad Waqar would falsely implicate Abdullah Usman or Yasin; and as to the factum of the commission of the offence it is also established beyond doubt that carnal intercourse was committed by Abdullah Usman. The medical opinion, in our view, supports the charge as it not only shows that force was used but also that there was insertion of the male organ. The mere presence of semen cannot be a decisive factor in the context of other important features noted medically which go to show the commission of the act. Equally there is no rule of law or prudence to require corroboration of the story of the victim if otherwise his testimony answers the quality required for conviction and if, at all, for arguments sake, the testimony did require corroboration it was provided by the testimony of Muhammad Asrar and Shaukat Amir.

Accordingly, we see no merit in these appeals which are dismissed. Yasin has already served out the sentence while Abdullah Usman is on bail. He should surrender to his bail bonds to serve out the remaining sentence.

M.I. Appeals dismissed

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.